Executive Summary

The Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL), in partnership and coordination with the International Campaign for Tibet (ICT), deployed the Tibet International Expert Election Observation Mission (TIEEOM) to observe and assess the 2026 elections for the 18th Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile. The mission examined the electoral process within the distinctive context of Tibetan democracy in exile: a stateless, globally dispersed, and community-based electoral system administered without sovereign territorial authority, but sustained through institutional legitimacy, community participation, and the commitment of Tibetans in exile to democratic self-governance.

The Tibetan electoral process occupies a distinctive place within the global democratic landscape. Unlike elections conducted within sovereign states, Tibetan elections are administered across a globally dispersed electorate residing in multiple jurisdictions and operating within the legal frameworks of host countries. The electoral process therefore serves not only as a mechanism for selecting political representatives but also as an important expression of political identity, democratic legitimacy, and collective self-determination. The continued conduct of regular, competitive, and participatory elections remains a significant achievement of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) and the wider Tibetan community in exile.

The 2025–2026 electoral cycle was significant for both continuity and renewal within the CTA. The preliminary election was held on 1 February 2026, during which incumbent Sikyong Penpa Tsering secured 61.025 percent of the vote and was declared elected without the need for a final round. In addition, the preliminary elections also narrowed down the candidates for the 18th Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile elections. The final election for the 18th Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile was held on 26 April 2026. According to the Central Tibetan Election Commission, 41,638 voters out of 91,073 registered voters participated in the final round, producing a turnout of 45.71 percent. A total of 570 ballots were rejected as invalid, and 45 members were elected to the 18th Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile, including 17 new members.

ANFREL’s observation focused on selected Tibetan settlements and institutional centres in India. The mission assessed key stages of the process, including voter participation and awareness, campaign environment, Election Day procedures, vote-counting, results, and the post-election environment. 

Overall, ANFREL found that the election was peaceful, orderly, community-driven, and credible in the areas observed. Election officials demonstrated professionalism and dedication despite operating under significant resource and logistical constraints. Polling and counting procedures were generally conducted in an organized manner, voters were able to cast their ballots without undue interference, and the final results were announced in a timely fashion and broadly accepted by stakeholders in the areas observed.

At the same time, ANFREL identified areas where the process could be strengthened, including the legal framework, election code of conduct, voter education, youth and first-time voter outreach, candidate information, ballot secrecy, assisted voting procedures, accessibility, counting standardization, invalid-ballot criteria, misinformation response, and complaint-handling mechanisms.

The mission found that the legal framework provided a generally coherent basis for democratic elections and reflected the continued evolution of Tibetan democratic governance. The Charter of the Tibetans in Exile, together with the Election Rules and Regulations and supplementary directives issued by the Election Commission, established clear procedures for voter registration, candidate nomination, campaigning, voting, counting, and dispute resolution. At the same time, stakeholders identified opportunities to further modernize the framework, particularly in relation to campaign regulation, candidate engagement, digital campaigning, and mechanisms that facilitate informed voter choice.

The mission further found that the Central Tibetan Election Commission played a critical role in maintaining the credibility of the electoral process. The Commission successfully administered elections across countries through a network of regional election offices and more than 1,700 election officials and volunteers. However, the mission observed that the Commission’s ability to fulfil its increasingly complex mandate was constrained by limited permanent staffing and institutional resources. As Tibetan elections continue to evolve, strengthening the institutional capacity of the Commission will be essential to ensuring the sustainability and credibility of future electoral processes.

ANFREL observed strong levels of civic commitment among many voters, particularly among older generations who viewed electoral participation as both a democratic right and a responsibility toward the Tibetan cause. However, enthusiasm for the final parliamentary election appeared lower than for the preliminary round and the Sikyong election, partly because the Sikyong election had already been decided. Youth and first-time voters appeared less informed and less engaged in some areas, with limited awareness of candidate profiles, parliamentary roles, and the relationship between the preliminary and final rounds.

Voter education was generally effective on basic procedural matters, including the election date, Green Book requirement, and eligibility rules. Information was mainly shared through settlement-level networks, WhatsApp groups, monastic channels, women’s groups, youth networks, posters, and public reminders. However, outreach was less consistent for youth, first-time voters, mobile voters, and voters outside regular community networks. ANFREL recommends more targeted voter education, accessible and bilingual materials, inclusive outreach, review of seasonal barriers, and stronger digital communication.

The campaign environment was peaceful, restrained, and largely compliant with election rules. Candidates generally conducted modest campaigns through posters, limited in-person outreach, social media, and online discussions. ANFREL did not observe major campaign-related violence, intimidation, or serious disputes.

The non-party-based electoral system encouraged candidates to frame their participation as public service rather than partisan competition. While this contributed to a calm campaign environment, it also limited opportunities for voters to compare candidates’ priorities, legislative vision, and public service commitments. Candidate information was circulated through WhatsApp groups, notice boards, public displays, and CEC-provided biographies, but access remained uneven, especially for younger and first-time voters.

Misinformation and disinformation emerged as a growing concern. Stakeholders reported misleading election-related posts, misuse of election logos, fake candidate profiles, and unverified online content. ANFREL did not observe evidence that such content seriously disrupted the final election, but it remains a structural risk. ANFREL recommends stronger candidate information systems, neutral candidate forums, substantive participation of women and youth, digital information integrity mechanisms, and proportionate campaign finance disclosure.

ANFREL’s observers visited multiple polling stations on Election Day and assessed opening, voting, and closing procedures. Overall, Election Day was peaceful, orderly, and professionally managed in the areas observed. Polling stations were generally prepared, essential materials were available, and polling staff were courteous and familiar with the main procedures.

Voting was generally efficient. Green Books were checked, voter lists were verified, ballot papers were issued, and voters were guided where necessary. Support was also provided to elderly voters and voters requiring assistance, reflecting the community-based character of the process.

The main concern was ballot secrecy. In several polling stations, voting spaces did not provide sufficient privacy, and observers noted instances where voters discussed choices, displayed marked ballots, or used mobile phones in ways that could compromise secrecy. Assisted voting was also not uniformly regulated, and accessibility varied across polling stations. The closing process was orderly, but reconciliation and chain-of-custody procedures differed across locations. ANFREL recommends stronger ballot secrecy standards, clearer assisted voting rules, improved accessibility planning, user-friendly voting information, and standardized closing and chain-of-custody protocols.

ANFREL observed counting in selected counting centres. The process was peaceful, orderly, and broadly transparent. Counting centres were generally spacious, required officials were present, and sealed ballot boxes or election materials were checked before opening. Ballots were sorted, tallied, and discussed collectively where questions arose.

The post-election environment in the observed areas was calm and peaceful. ANFREL did not observe or receive reports of major public tension, security incidents, or formal complaints affecting acceptance of the final results in the areas monitored. However, the dispute concerning Choejor Tibetan neighbourhood in Nepal highlighted the need for clearer complaint and dispute-resolution procedures. ANFREL recommends standardized counting procedures, clearer invalid-ballot criteria, uniform result recording formats, post-election procedural review, and stronger complaint mechanisms. 

Ultimately, ANFREL found that the 2025–2026 electoral process demonstrated the continuing vitality of Tibetan democracy in exile. The election reflected a strong commitment to democratic governance, peaceful political participation, and institutional legitimacy despite the significant structural constraints associated with statelessness and geographic dispersion. At the same time, the mission concluded that the long-term resilience of Tibetan democracy would depend upon continued efforts to strengthen electoral institutions, modernize electoral regulations, expand voter engagement, and enhance the capacity of the Central Tibetan Election Commission to effectively administer elections throughout the electoral cycle.

Legitimacy lies at the heart of democratic elections. The continued ability of the Central Tibetan Administration to maintain public confidence in its democratic institutions will depend not only on the conduct of credible elections, but also on the sustained strengthening of the institutions responsible for administering them. 

Addressing the issues identified in this report would further strengthen the integrity, inclusiveness, and credibility of future elections. Such efforts would not only enhance public confidence in democratic institutions but also reinforce the legitimacy that lies at the heart of democratic governance in exile. The continued evolution of Tibetan democracy will depend on its ability to adapt to changing realities while remaining firmly grounded in the principles of participation, accountability, representation, and respect for the democratic aspirations of Tibetans worldwide.

DOWNLOAD THE FULL REPORT: “The Long Road Home: Sustaining Democracy in Exile“